When assessing your client who has a history of falls, you should pay particular attention to which of the following? (Select all that apply.)

A. Defecation less than once each day is not necessarily constipation.

Explanation: The frequency of bowel movements varies among individuals, and defecating less than once each day does not necessarily indicate constipation. Normal bowel habits can differ, and what is considered regular for one person may not be the same for another. Constipation is better assessed by considering other factors such as stool consistency, straining during bowel movements, and feelings of incomplete evacuation.

B. Leaking liquid feces should be treated as diarrhea.

Explanation: Leaking liquid feces may be indicative of diarrhea, but it is not the only factor to consider. The cause of diarrhea should be investigated, and treatment will depend on the underlying reason, which may include infections, medications, or other medical conditions.

C. Mineral oil is recommended as a laxative for the older adult.

Explanation: Mineral oil is generally not recommended as a laxative for older adults. It can interfere with the absorption of fat-soluble vitamins and may have adverse effects. There are other safer and more effective laxative options that healthcare providers may recommend.

D. Excessive sleep can be a symptom of constipation.

Explanation: Excessive sleep is not typically considered a symptom of constipation. Constipation is more commonly associated with symptoms such as infrequent bowel movements, difficulty passing stool, and abdominal discomfort. Sleep disturbances may have various causes, but they are not a direct symptom of constipation.

A. Because a conservatorship is the least restrictive alternative, a court hearing is not required.

Explanation: This statement is not accurate. Conservatorships are legal arrangements that involve the appointment of a conservator to manage the financial affairs and assets of an individual who is unable to do so themselves. While conservatorships may be necessary for the protection of the individual, they are not automatically considered the least restrictive alternative, and a court hearing is typically required to establish one.

B. The most legally restricting way individuals and property can be handled are through conservatorships and guardianships.

Explanation: This statement is partially true. Conservatorships and guardianships are legal mechanisms that grant authority to individuals (conservators and guardians, respectively) to manage the affairs of someone who is unable to do so themselves. While they involve legal restrictions, whether they are the most restrictive or not can depend on the specific details of the arrangement and the jurisdiction.

C. A conservatorship entails control over property, whereas a guardianship entails control over the person.

Explanation: This statement is true. In general, a conservatorship focuses on managing the financial affairs and assets of an individual, while a guardianship involves decision-making authority over personal and healthcare matters. The roles and responsibilities of conservators and guardians may vary by jurisdiction, but the distinction between control over property and control over the person is a common principle.

D. Conservators cannot be members of the conservatee's (client's) family.

Explanation: This statement is not universally true. In many cases, family members can be appointed as conservators. The court will typically consider the best interests of the individual in need of protection when appointing a conservator, and a family member may be deemed suitable if they can fulfill the responsibilities of the role. The specific rules regarding who can be a conservator may vary by jurisdiction.